D&D 5E Survivor: Core Classes There Can Be Only 1.

[EzekielRaiden]

um....this doesn't make sense. The voting mechanics had an upvote and to give points to classes/races/etc that you liked. The ones that won are the ones that the most people liked the most. The way the voting mechanics work clearly supports that.

When negative opinions are valued three times as much as positive opinions, the results will be biased toward negative opinions rather than positive ones. Hated things will disappear quickly. Negative pressure is three times greater than positive pressure--thus, the method creates a selective pressure to not be hated, which is not the same thing as being liked. "Hated" may be too strong a word, but still--absence of substantial negative opinion is what the voting rules select for, 3x as much as presence of positive opinion. Or, to put it another way: a two-thirds majority of players loving a particular option is not enough to save it if the remaining one-third absolutely

Just because you think they are bland, doesn't mean they are.

This is correct. And, as I said in my previous post, I chose words that were excessive. Call it hyperbole for effect--probably unjustified hyperbole, but still.

I don't particularly like the bard, but that doesn't mean I think it's bland class that won only because it was the least offensive. Speaking of, your entire premise if flawed by saying the X that won were the least offensive because it's predicated on having every choice being offensive on some level, and people just voted against those they found most offensive. Like choosing the worse of two evils.

Do you mean to assert that there are no options in D&D which have 0 detractors whatsoever? Because unless you do, it is true that on some level every option IS offensive. Since I don't believe there are any perfect choices, and that every game (including the ones I love) has both general flaws and context-specific problems that will lead at least some people to fervently dislike particular elements.

Maybe D&D isn't the game for you if you think that way. I sure as heck wouldn't play a game where I had a negative attitude toward every class and race ranging from "somewhat bothers me" to "I hate it". I actually am the opposite of you. I didn't vote up the least offensive and vote down the most offensive. I upvoted the ones I liked the most, and downvoted the ones I liked the least. You're choosing between liver and artichokes, and I'm choosing between strawberry or chocolate ice cream. At least, that's how this statement is coming across.

You're taking my statements as though I was referring solely to my own thoughts, which I was not. I am referring to the collective thoughts of the participants. I think it's basically inarguable that every option is going to be disliked, and not just "liked less" to use your structure, by someone. And the statements people made about their own votes pretty clearly reflect that a good portion--not all, surely, but not few either--do not think as you do, and DO have some "liver" options (I personally like artichokes, though i mostly prefer them steamed and dipped in butter) in addition to whatever strawberry-or-chocolate options they have. They DO have class(es) or race(s) they just straight-up dislike, and others they straight-up like. Thus, because dislike is definitely present and is favored 3:1 over like by the voting structure, dislike is the strongest selective pressure. Dramatically so. For votes on a particular option, it takes a 75% majority liking it simply to maintain position, let alone improve its position.

I would even argue that that is why, in the Alignment thread, Chaotic alignments disappeared so quickly, and why LG fell before LE despite Evil alignments being outright banned in most games. There's just a sufficient "hatedom" for those alignments that, even if they are substantially well-liked by half the people voting, they'll disappear quickly. That's not reflecting what some or even most people like; it's removing what some people dislike.

I like, and have tried, plenty of things in D&D and similar games. Half-orc "fighter" (this was in a semi-freeformed PbtA game so he wasn't technically a "Fighter" per se.) Human paladin. Dragonborn sorcerer. Heck, I'm playing a 5e Dragonborn Bard right now--my second session is tomorrow evening. So it's no "liver vs. avocado." (Substituting avocados, since I do dislike them.) It's more "kiwi vs. apple vs. orange vs. avocado." I have a clear favorite (I love kiwifruit) and a clear un-favorite (avocado)--and kiwi disappears almost immediately because seven people dislike it strongly, as it is their un-favorite.

When negative feeling is significantly more important than positive feeling, even if "negative" is only in a weak and relative sense, it will be the prime selective pressure. And I don't believe for a second that there aren't significant--within the context of the 'survivor contest,' this would mean at least 5 people--groups who have genuine negative feeling for several options in each of the 'survivor contests' we've seen. And it doesn't even have to be "hate" per se, just "I really don't like this because it doesn't fit with how I see the D&D world." That's what killed the Monk so quickly--I don't think very many people "hate" it, but it is "disliked" enough by enough people to kill it, no matter how many fans it has.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Well, Lowkey, all I can say is that people were already saying--perhaps casually, perhaps not meaning it as it sounded--that the "most popular" character was a half-elf Bard, and were talking about what alignment that character would have. That strikes me as deriving a "probative" result. Like I said, it might be people just using the short, casual way of saying it, but it didn't seem like that to me at the time.

And in my experience, people treat forum polls as highly representative...when it's convenient for them to treat them so. E.g., when the poll supports, or can be construed to support, their argument. Doesn't matter whether it's for or against any given issue. That's why I give a consistent response to all polls I see: I explicitly state how useless they are, both to remind people that they really mean very, very little, and to make sure *I* don't become a big ol' hypocrite for trying to get "real data" out of a forum poll when I've spoken out against doing so many times.